Well...that's a bit over my head Hubster.It sounds like you might be saying...One bad apple spoils the whole bunch?Course,apples can't help what they are...people?Not so much methinks.

Well... It sounds like you might be saying...One bad apple spoils the whole bunch?

You would be correct. There is this caliphate needing a rebuild/startup is more or less in the rule book, the war book, the playbook kind of cult following; all laid out as a broken plan about to collapse soon enough. Between the ottomans, the moors, the ones in between, all seem to have one theme... no civilization, economic structure, contribution to the world. I wouldn't count oil that the west figured out how to pull from the ground and refine. More like the Edisons, the medical discoveries, etc.

So if I find this manual to follow and its simple rules, ask where a muzzy stands answering these questions:
Caliphate or Democracy?
ISIS or Israel?
Shithere law or the US Constitution?

Being a muzzy in a western world ain't gonna work. This works against the book, right?
Democracy does not work in the middleyeast infection... shit, I just insulted a 'culture.'
Israel, right? If I have to tell you it's the western culture they do not like, etc., you don't get it.
How could I be a true follower if I have to follow the US Connie is the only game in town... sound like a problem to you?

"Cali's Fate" ring a bell?

Well..I see what you're saying.But the whole 'jihad' thing is at the root of this 'march madness'.Moderate Muslims denounce this armed assault on others because of a 'different faith'.In fact..the Q book says armed attack is NOT a method of jihad."Inner struggle"...that's what Jihad is.Very much like "resist the devil and he shall flee" spoken by Christ."We fight not against flesh and blood but against powers,principalities,spiritual wickedness in high places".

This is what Jihad really is about as well.Spiritual battle.Freeing oneself.In spiritual matters.Not by physical violence.

I haven't read the Q...but I've seen videos on the tube with top clerics explaining this.Every one of em condemns this violent jihad totally.A ploy to get into 'good graces' with 'infidels' so they can turn and burn the unbelievers?IDK.They sounded sincere and adamant against Jihad as it's represented today.

It was Bin Laden that really 'changed' the meaning of jihad.To a people starving for acknowledgment...it took off like a shiitestorm.There is no doubt the Takfiris had a big part to do with the twisting of the Q and 'jihad'.

Bin Laden CAME from Saudi Arabia..was denounced by his family.The Takifis are a Saudi Arabian offshoot of Islam.They've always taken a violent stance in regards to Jihad.They aren't liked in Saudi Arabia....it was 'natural' for em to attempt to overthrow the house of Saud.Bin Laden left and started this 'holy war'...and expanded on it to create this radical interpretation of 'jihad'.I mean...that's what I've read.It makes sense...to me anyway.

Saudi Arabia is mainly 'Salifas'...been at war with the Takfiris for centuries.There it is really.

The jihad was never meant as a global violent overthrow of any country.Bin Laden was pissed getting thrown out.Of his Family.He wanted recognition and a name for himself...he got it.

I'll say again...for centuries Jews,Muslims,and several other 'religions' have gotten along in the middle east.They had differences..like anyone else.But they weren't doing anything even close to this armed jihad with their neighbors(physical neighbors I mean).This 'jihad ideology' set everything on fire.I've read posted interviews with these 'peaceful muslims' regarding living in neighborhoods with other faiths.They got along fine.Helping each other and all that...being real caring people towards each other.They're totally broken that these extremists came in and destroyed all the good that they had in their communities.

* Last updated by: Grn14 on 12/6/2015 @ 9:38 AM *

Honestly...I really am not sure of the 'global' 'domination' of Islam.I mean...if that's an actual goal of Islam.A radical definitely believes this.It would appear like that listening to some of these hardline radical groups.But the 'moderates' aren't saying that...a ruse?IDK.From what I've read(again,on the internet)...'Islam' as presented by some(Q book)does have certain dialogues in it that mention 'getting the 'infidels' close' by pretending to be 'friends' to 'overcome them'...but I'm not sure that means...to kill em.It could mean...to win them over?IDK.

FWIW....."The Arabic word "jihad" is often translated as "holy war," but in a purely linguistic sense, the word " jihad" means struggling or striving.
The arabic word for war is: "al-harb".
In a religious sense, as described by the Quran and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (s), "jihad" has many meanings. It can refer to internal as well as external efforts to be a good Muslims or believer, as well as working to inform people about the faith of Islam.
If military jihad is required to protect the faith against others, it can be performed using anything from legal, diplomatic and economic to political means. If there is no peaceful alternative, Islam also allows the use of force, but there are strict rules of engagement. Innocents - such as women, children, or invalids - must never be harmed, and any peaceful overtures from the enemy must be accepted.
Military action is therefore only one means of jihad, and is very rare. To highlight this point, the Prophet Mohammed told his followers returning from a military campaign: "This day we have returned from the minor jihad to the major jihad," which he said meant returning from armed battle to the peaceful battle for self-control and betterment.
In case military action appears necessary, not everyone can declare jihad. The religious military campaign has to be declared by a proper authority, advised by scholars, who say the religion and people are under threat and violence is imperative to defend them. The concept of "just war" is very important.
The concept of jihad has been hijacked by many political and religious groups over the ages in a bid to justify various forms of violence. In most cases, Islamic splinter groups invoked jihad to fight against the established Islamic order. Scholars say this misuse of jihad contradicts Islam.
Examples of sanctioned military jihad include the Muslims' defensive battles against the Crusaders in medieval times, and before that some responses by Muslims against Byzantine and Persian attacks during the period of the early Islamic conquests.
WHAT JIHAD IS NOT

Jihad is not a violent concept.
Jihad is not a declaration of war against other religions. It is worth noting that the Koran specifically refers to Jews and Christians as "people of the book" who should be protected and respected. All three faiths worship the same God. Allah is just the Arabic word for God, and is used by Christian Arabs as well as Muslims.
Military action in the name of Islam has not been common in the history of Islam. Scholars says most calls for violent jihad are not sanctioned by Islam.
Warfare in the name of God is not unique to Islam. Other faiths throughout the world have waged wars with religious justifications"...

...Jihad: A Misunderstood Concept from Islam - What Jihad is, and is not
SHAYKH MUHAMMAD HISHAM KABBANI (CHAIRMAN, ISLAMIC SUPREME COUNCIL OF AMERICA) AND SHAYKH SERAJ HENDRICKS (HEAD MUFTI, CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA)

Personally...the use of armed force allowed with this religion IS against the tenets of the Christian God.It is.Jesus clearly stated that.."Put up thy sword..they that live by the sword shall also die by it"...so Christ NEVER condoned violence against ANY person.ANY.And also,the statement above in the 'Islamic view' of Allah being the same God as the others there...I don't believe that.The ancient persians worshipped this 'Allah'...the MOON God.If that's the case with this Allah of Islam...it isn't the same God...not even.So there IS a big crack in Islamic 'faith' if this is true.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Who+is+Allah+to+the+Muslims&rlz=1C1CYCW_enUS660US660&oq=Who+is+Allah+to+the+Muslims&aqs=chrome..69i57.12543j0j8&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#

I'm not trying to be for or against here...this is a site for Islam.Who knows if these guys are 'telling the truth' about Islamic ideologies or not?IDK.

* Last updated by: Grn14 on 12/6/2015 @ 10:09 AM *

After all is said and done, Islam is a violent, anti-infidel religion even if most Muslims do not interpret it that way. The majority of moderate Muslims are probably fence sitters. They're not against us but they're not solidly on our side either. They'll easily turn if the tide changes directions. They may not be an immediate threat but they are a potential threat...much more so than non-Muslims. The best we can hope for is to maintain military superiority over the fundamentalists so the moderates lean our direction.

Yeah,I think you're right.

Rook, of all the entries on this thread so far, in my opinion that is one of the most astute.
Perhaps a little kind, but very well articulated...

No matter on what level Muslims stand with their faith, be it extreme, moderate or in between they all believe in the word of Mohamed and the Koran which preach death to the infidel non believers be they innocent or not.

Any follower who cannot see this as an evil ideology and freely chooses to continues with this faith is a threat.
Each and everyone of them.
As you very correctly point out the moderates can turn into much more at the blink of an eye if the situation dictates, no matter what that situation might turn out to be.

One of the most effective sleeper cells of all time.
And our do gooder politically correct leaders are allowing it to continually develop every day...

* Last updated by: yannih on 12/6/2015 @ 3:06 PM *

You can't stop this...no more than you can stop atheists from believing in that.Whattya gonna do...kill every Muslum on the planet?Good luck with that.That's why BOMBS(though helpful in maybe Syria or somewhere)...covert ops...whatever,will only slow the physical advance of these people.Hell...they're in every country.You gonna use military force everywhere?No one can see into the heart of each person.That's what it would take.I'm totally for THOROUGH vetting.That's no guarantee as was mentioned.It aint just Muslim either.The web's FULL of Western Countries haters.Living right here.They're not Muslim either.

I'm tellin ya...times coming when men will BEG God to help.There's no atheists in foxholes...some day,gonna be too late.God's been warning man for a LONG time.You can get in NOW...while there's Grace.The word however will never change....it's a done deal.

* Last updated by: Grn14 on 12/6/2015 @ 4:19 PM *

Whattya gonna do...kill every Muslum on the planet?

Obama's talking about the San Bernardino attack right now. What he said about this very topic, attitudes toward Muslim citizens, was pretty idealistic. I hope it is the right direction take. I think Putin's position on Syrian refugees is much more intelligent. I would feel much safer if I was a Russian.

"I would feel much safer if I was a Russian"...not me.Russia is now on the #1 hitlist with ISIS.

* Last updated by: Hub on 12/6/2015 @ 7:20 PM *

She's pretty staunch.Has some good points though.I'm all for armed citizens.Hell yeah.Up here they're all over the place..We don't really have much gun violence.A few that've gone off the deep end and killed spouces and such...but overall...no.

I'm in agreement with lots of others...citizens being able to step in at certain times could possibly stop something before it gets to the point of others being killed.

I'll say...there's really no shortage of citizens carrying and owning firearms...not here anyway.

Ok, here's my view on guns and then you guys can tell me I'm full of crap. First, seeing how utterly inept most average citizens are at managing their lives, cars, relationships etc, Hell no I don't want these yahoos owning guns. A majority of people, out here at least, cannot even operate their vehicle in a safe manner. If an active shooter burst into a room full of these idiots, dozens would end up shooting each other.
I think guns should be at least treated like cars. You have to get trained, you have to get licensed, you have to pass a test, you take recurrent training once in awhile. That would more accurately fullfill the "responsible gun owner" requirement. As it is, you have more training for your car, an object designed for mostly benign use, than a gun, an object that's primary purpose is to destroy things.
Ok, so go ahead and rip me to shreds. I've got my popcorn...

Mad

You've got real point.No doubt.All the 'carriers' I've seen here are responsible.They seem to have their shit together.But of course...there are those others.But getting a carry permit DOES require an 'observation' by someone who's 'got it together'.I mean...doesn't it?This isn't something you can just simply do 'online' or something.I could be wrong here.

BTW..HUBSTER...that 'debate' deal...funny chit!God musta been laughing His...well...you know.;)

* Last updated by: Grn14 on 12/7/2015 @ 11:19 AM *

I'll say...there's really no shortage of citizens carrying and owning firearms...not here anyway.

I think guns should be at least treated like cars. You have to get trained, you have to get licensed, you have to pass a test, you take recurrent training once in awhile.

I think those are all great ideas. If that's too much of a PITA for someone, then that's someone who doesn't need to be carrying a gun.

.But getting a carry permit DOES require an 'observation' by someone who's 'got it together'.I mean...doesn't it?This isn't something you can just simply do 'online' or something.I could be wrong here.

IDK. I have one friend who is into personal protection guns and his ownership of the guns is a lifestyle.

What the judge said up there is exactly what I would have liked to hear the president say.

.Russia is now on the #1 hitlist with ISIS.

Rather than pandering to moderate Muslims by allowing immigration, I'd like to see the nations of the world strengthen ties by uniting military forces and go in there and clean these fuckers up. Muslim citizens of the West should support that and if they don't, they should not be in the West.

I would feel much safer if I was a Russian.

One thing to consider; All Russians have dashcams in their cars so they can defend themselves in court, mostly from abusive police. There are gangsters there that make the Mafia, the Crips and the Bloods look like schoolchildren.

ok, statement retracted but I still think Putin is reacting to the terrorist threat and Muslim immigration wisely and I wish our president had similar opinions on these particular issues.

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xla1/v/t1.0-9/1460038_10151832197506275_1274334293_n.jpg?oh=1864fa45dedc141c732472637afe1bdc&oe=56DEF87F

I'm a NRA Life/Endowment member and I agree completely with Mad!

You have to get trained, you have to get licensed, you have to pass a test, you take recurrent training once in awhile. That would more accurately fulfill the "responsible gun owner" requirement.

I got my first safety training at 12 in Boy Scouts. First time I fired an M16 was at a police training session they held for the Boy Scouts, but they only let us fire 3 rnd burst.

I'm a qualified high power marksman, my wife and kids are all very well safety trained because I do own a few legal toys. I believe strongly in regular safety training and after 45 yrs of shooting sports I still take a yearly range safety training at the club I belong to.

Living in LA county I can only wish I had the option to legally train and carry if I choose to do so. Defending my life and my family against a terrorist is not a viable need to justify the CCW approval.

If anyone is going off to Russia I can be a translator.

Putin comes off as a patriarchal figure with complete control and most Russians respect him and will obey because they believe he has their safety and best interests in mind. As news unfolds and people feel uncertain, they look up to a powerful leader and that is why his popularity increases abroad.

Political correctness makes it difficult for western leaders to keep citizens from harms way. Someone like Trump, will be hammered relentlessly for speaking his mind and for those reasons will not likely get the Rep. nomination.

I sold my guns 15 years ago and now considering a small rifle.

It's too bad Putin is in bed with Assad.I think the FSA(the rebels)really are fighting to free their country of a brutal dictator.

Unfortunately,Russia is killing both ISIS and the FSA.Which means of course...LOTS of civilians casualties.First it was Assad with Barrel Bombs on civilians...now they have Russian Warplanes and all against em.Totally messed up.

ISIS must really be laughing their asses off..watching their Muslim ('infidel')brothers and families getting killed.One less enemy to worry about I guess.What a tragic shitstorm.

The other thread 'can the cult be trusted' is no. The muz " They Own It." They are insulted they need to give up their jihad followers in America? Are christians/jews/hindu/scientologists bombing around the world? NO! So who owns it? The muz. Who can do something about it? The muz.

So what is the ratio of nickles and his buddy with the manure bomb at that fed building and the muzzy bombings in the USA? How many have been stopped we don't know/hear about behind the scenes? More muz than Americans is that's for sure.

Can they be trusted? Are we at a foregone conclusion yet?

You can't trust a terrorist.Regardless of what ethnic place they're from.Terrorists aren't limited to Muslim peoples.

"Can they be trusted? Are we at a foregone conclusion yet?"...IDK.I'm not at a foregone conclusion.

* Last updated by: Grn14 on 12/9/2015 @ 3:07 PM *